Symmetrical vs. Asymmetrical Martial Arts

[Gerry Seymour]

I was thinking the Same thing. In my mind I was imagining forms that are symmetrical. The techniques you perform facing one direction then mirror the same techniques to the other side.

Yeah, before I read the OP, I was thinking maybe boxing was asymmetrical, since most folks do most of their fighting with the same hand forward all the time.

 

[skribs]

Yeah, before I read the OP, I was thinking maybe boxing was asymmetrical, since most folks do most of their fighting with the same hand forward all the time.

Oh don't even get me started on asymmetrical forms!

 

[Martial D]

Asymmetrical sparring. There are rules to govern the training, but there is no winner or loser. There is only success or failure of the defender. The attacker's job is to make sure the defender executes the technique.

Let me give an example. I am the defender. My partner is the attacker.

1. He throws a punch combination. I get punched. I failed.
2. He throws a punch combination. I manage to grab his arm, but he punches me with his other hand. I failed.
3. He throws a punch combination. I manage to grab his arm, and keep him from punching me with his free hand. He escapes. I failed.
4. He throws a punch combination. I manage to grab his arm, and secure my grip, but I can't execute a take-down in a reasonable amount of time. I failed.
5. He throws a punch combination. I manage to grab his arm, and secure my grip, and execute the take-down, but he is able to bring me down with him. I failed.
6. He throws a punch combination. I manage to grab his arm, and secure my grip, and execute the take-down, but I lose my grip in the level change. I failed.
   
7. He throws a punch combination. I manage to get him down into a controlled position, but I don't have the right leverage for the submission. I don't get a chance to correct this. I failed.
8. He throws a punch combination. I manage to get him down into a controlled position, and I take too long to decide the right submission to take. I failed.
9. He throws a punch combination. I block until I am able to grab hold, and control the situation until his only option is to tap. I succeeded.

For him, there is no "success" and "failure". There is no winning or losing. His only goal is to give me a good test of my abilities. There are rules, and to some degree it is a game. If at any point I hesitate, fail to execute, or leave an opening, then I fail. Half of the time, even if I succeed, my Master tells me why I failed, something I left open that my opponent didn't see. There are also rules relating to how much force we can use, because we're not about broken bones and concussions.

This is not a real fight. It is not sport-based. It is asymmetrical. But there is definitely resistance. These sparring matches are not scripted, and we take turns who is the attacker and defender.

It's similar (but opposite) to puppies or kittens playing chase, in which one plays the role of the predator, and the other the prey. In Chase, the predator is the one who is the focus, since good chasing skills are necessary for the hunt. In the case of us, it is the prey - the defender - who is the focus, so we can train to defend ourselves from predators.

Sure, there are a million conceivable drills of that sort. One guy can only strike, one guy can only grapple...one guy can attack, the other defends, one guy is throwing round kicks while the other guy only checks etc. I do variations of these every day.

These are situational drills you can do with any style. That still doesn't answer my question though, and are certainly no substitute for the sort of actual ring or street experience requisite to know what a fight is.

 

[Martial D]

This might be a difference of semantics. Would you include things outside of formal competitions in "sport"?

I think good, strong resistance is important. I don't think it has to be in a formal competition, though that's a convenient way to get a wide range of opponents to work with.

Sport fighting has some sort of external entity dictating win conditions based on some criteria.

Sparring has no win conditions or external dictates, but rather some sort of agreement as per boundaries agreed upon by the participants.

If there are no dictated win conditions or mutual boundaries, you have departed from the realm of sport fighting..and into..fighting.

With this I am talking about the activity itself, rather than the sort of preparitory drills mentioned in my last post.

 

[skribs]

Sure, there are a million conceivable drills of that sort. One guy can only strike, one guy can only grapple...one guy can attack, the other defends, one guy is throwing round kicks while the other guy only checks etc. I do variations of these every day.

These are situational drills you can do with any style. That still doesn't answer my question though, and are certainly no substitute for the sort of actual ring or street experience requisite to know what a fight is.

I don't see what your other examples have to do with the sparring we're talking about. It's not about checking your grappling vs. a striker, and it's not about drilling a specific technique. Because you don't seem to understand the method, I'm going to ignore your analysis of it and try to explain it again.

If I am the aggressor, it is my job to:

1. First aggress, and put you into a defensive position
2. Try to escape, counter, or resist anything you try and do to defend yourself
3. Take advantage of any holes you leave open, whether I can punch, kick, get you in a chokehold, etc

I'm not throwing a punch combination and then as soon as you grab my arm freezing into a demonstration dummy. I'm actively trying to thwart your techniques at every level and at the very least get back to a neutral setting.

If you compare it to a sport, it would be the same as if you started watching an MMA fight 10 seconds in, when someone is already punching or clinching, and the other person is already defending themselves. In fact, the training is more stringent than sport training, because in a sport you only lose when you're KO'd, pinned, submitted, or when the rounds are over and you have less points. In this, you lose if you fail at any point along the way.

The post you quoted of mine, that wasn't 9 different drills. That was the same scenario, over and over, with my opponent responding to what I am trying to do each time and coming at me with a plan already to thwart what I am trying to do. They know I'm going for an inside takedown so they're looking for the body grab or the chokehold. They know I'm keeping my guard up to block the punches so they throw a kick. They know what type of submission I'm going for and set themselves up to avoid it.

Just because it isn't in a ring, or in the street, doesn't mean there isn't resistance. If you don't understand how you can have resistance in scenario-based training, it doesn't affect me. Because I know I'm getting it. Maybe it's something you have to experience to understand. It's my Master telling me to attack you, and you needing to defend yourself. And if I get you into any disadvantaged position, you lose.

 

[skribs]

Sport fighting has some sort of external entity dictating win conditions based on some criteria.

Sparring has no win conditions or external dictates, but rather some sort of agreement as per boundaries agreed upon by the participants.

If there are no dictated win conditions or mutual boundaries, you have departed from the realm of sport fighting..and into..fighting.

With this I am talking about the activity itself, rather than the sort of preparitory drills mentioned in my last post.

What arts do you train? Every art I have trained or seen, the sparring has rules. Even in our Hapkido, with asymmetric sparring, there are rules and win conditions.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Sport fighting has some sort of external entity dictating win conditions based on some criteria.

Sparring has no win conditions or external dictates, but rather some sort of agreement as per boundaries agreed upon by the participants.

If there are no dictated win conditions or mutual boundaries, you have departed from the realm of sport fighting..and into..fighting.

With this I am talking about the activity itself, rather than the sort of preparitory drills mentioned in my last post.

Okay, I guess I wasn't clear in what I was asking. So, if someone goes to a boxing gym and steps into the ring (under standard boxing rules, with someone there acting as ref, maybe someone even keeping track of score) with one of the guys for three rounds so they can test each other out, does that fit your definition of "sport"?

 

[drop bear]

Did you know that people can resist even if your training isn't sport based?

No they can't. Training with resistance is sport.

You set up rules and a scenario and then you both compete to win you basically are engaging in a sport.

 

[Martial D]

I don't see what your other examples have to do with the sparring we're talking about. It's not about checking your grappling vs. a striker, and it's not about drilling a specific technique. Because you don't seem to understand the method, I'm going to ignore your analysis of it and try to explain it again.

If I am the aggressor, it is my job to:

1. First aggress, and put you into a defensive position
2. Try to escape, counter, or resist anything you try and do to defend yourself
3. Take advantage of any holes you leave open, whether I can punch, kick, get you in a chokehold, etc

I'm not throwing a punch combination and then as soon as you grab my arm freezing into a demonstration dummy. I'm actively trying to thwart your techniques at every level and at the very least get back to a neutral setting.

If you compare it to a sport, it would be the same as if you started watching an MMA fight 10 seconds in, when someone is already punching or clinching, and the other person is already defending themselves. In fact, the training is more stringent than sport training, because in a sport you only lose when you're KO'd, pinned, submitted, or when the rounds are over and you have less points. In this, you lose if you fail at any point along the way.

The post you quoted of mine, that wasn't 9 different drills. That was the same scenario, over and over, with my opponent responding to what I am trying to do each time and coming at me with a plan already to thwart what I am trying to do. They know I'm going for an inside takedown so they're looking for the body grab or the chokehold. They know I'm keeping my guard up to block the punches so they throw a kick. They know what type of submission I'm going for and set themselves up to avoid it.

Just because it isn't in a ring, or in the street, doesn't mean there isn't resistance. If you don't understand how you can have resistance in scenario-based training, it doesn't affect me. Because I know I'm getting it. Maybe it's something you have to experience to understand. It's my Master telling me to attack you, and you needing to defend yourself. And if I get you into any disadvantaged position, you lose.

Wait, so your tkd gym is doing MMA training? Lol k.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

No they can't. Training with resistance is sport.

You set up rules and a scenario and then you both compete to win you basically are engaging in a sport.

I'm thinking that's the same definition @Martial D is using. I kinda like it.

 

[drop bear]

If your goal isn't sport, then sport training is irrelevant.

Just like if your goal is to win a wrestling match, training for X-on-1 or training knife defense is useless.

Wait a second. But training knife defence being able to wrestle really helps.

Which is the point.

 

[Martial D]

Okay, I guess I wasn't clear in what I was asking. So, if someone goes to a boxing gym and steps into the ring (under standard boxing rules, with someone there acting as ref, maybe someone even keeping track of score) with one of the guys for three rounds so they can test each other out, does that fit your definition of "sport"?

Certainly

 

[drop bear]

So this drill is specifically sport and self defence.

And asymmetric.

And notice by the way a misconception created by an assumption resolved without butthurt by a simple use of video evidence.

Nicely contributing to the discussion.

You are welcome.

 

[Martial D]

Wait a second. But training knife defence being able to wrestle really helps.

Which is the point.

I would go one step further and say being able to wrestle well would help more for knife defense than any number of seminar certified 'self defense' (tm) techniques you could learn from any TMA.

I certainly learned my fair share of them in my time training WC. I like being alive to much to ever use them.

 

[drop bear]

I would go one step further and say being able to wrestle well would help more for knife defense than any number of seminar certified 'self defense' (tm) techniques you could learn from any TMA.

I certainly learned my fair share of them in my time training WC. I like being alive to much to ever use them.

Which you would only know by creating a sport that involves someone trying to shank you and you trying to stop them.

Because then a good wrestler may just flip you on your head and then you can say that is good knife defence.

 

[skribs]

No they can't. Training with resistance is sport.

You set up rules and a scenario and then you both compete to win you basically are engaging in a sport.

We may be defining "sport" differently. For me, "sport" is something where you compete in tournaments or sanctioned matches. I don't consider our training to be sport, because there is no competition for Hapkido. (Well, there is, but you and I would both agree it's not real fighting).

Wait, so your tkd gym is doing MMA training? Lol k.

So much wrong with this:

1. Wrong art, this is Hapkido
2. I never said MMA, don't know why you assume we are
3. The assumption that just because it doesn't fit your misinformed notions of what the art can do, that we're not doing the art

I would go one step further and say being able to wrestle well would help more for knife defense than any number of seminar certified 'self defense' (tm) techniques you could learn from any TMA.

Which you would only know by creating a sport that involves someone trying to shank you and you trying to stop them.

Because then a good wrestler may just flip you on your head and then you can say that is good knife defence.

Depends. If the wrestler hasn't adjusted their techniques to account for the knife, you could end up very bloody before you execute the throw. Wrestlers aren't so concerned with a hand being near their abdomen, even in MMA (because if you have a good clinch, they can't get much power in their punch). But a hand with a knife near your abdomen is a lot worse.

But a wrestler who has thought through that and said "I need to also keep that hand away from me" will probably fair pretty well.

Either way, I'd rather bring a gun to a knife-fight if I have the chance. And if I'm going to train specifically for knife defense, I'm going to find a Kali school.

 

[skribs]

So this drill is specifically sport and self defence.

And asymmetric.

And notice by the way a misconception created by an assumption resolved without butthurt by a simple use of video evidence.

Nicely contributing to the discussion.

You are welcome.

You'll have to forgive me. My google-fu is terrible. In fact, my Bachelor's degree was earned more through finding ways to connect the dots between the random articles I found, than it was finding articles that supported my conclusions. We all have strengths and weaknesses and research is NOT mine. In fact, I almost lost a friend over it, because we were working together on a project and he assigned me a bunch of research. I told him I was bad at it and he told me to do it anyway. So I did a horrible job and he yelled at me for it. Then the next day my Master told me he wanted me to become an instructor, and I quit working with my friend so I could teach, and we remained friends. I am a good Taekwondoist and a good teacher, but a horrible researcher.

Also, if our disagreement is over vocabulary, a video is not going to change that disagreement. Your post I quoted earlier where you defined what a sport is, that is actually what warmed me up to what you were saying.

As to this video - this is why I said "symmetric and asymmetric" instead of "self defense and sport" in my original post. Because these drills they are working on, are asymmetric, and can apply to both. I think their current intended application is sport, based on their location and the fact we see "MMA" watermarks plastered all over it. But you are right that it can also apply to self defense.

 

[Martial D]

We may be defining "sport" differently. For me, "sport" is something where you compete in tournaments or sanctioned matches. I don't consider our training to be sport, because there is no competition for Hapkido. (Well, there is, but you and I would both agree it's not real fighting).

Wait. So boxing, kickboxing and MMA are not sport fighting if you don't have any matches behind you?

You and your wacky categories lol

So much wrong with this:

1. Wrong art, this is Hapkido
2. I never said MMA, don't know why you assume we are
3. The assumption that just because it doesn't fit your misinformed notions of what the art can do, that we're not doing the art

Lol k. I'm sure you are really fighting in your hapkido class. Sounds legit.

 

[skribs]

Wait. So boxing, kickboxing and MMA are not sport fighting if you don't have any matches behind you?

If you have no intention of competing, then they are not sport for you. There are benefits, such as fun, fitness and self defense, but they are not sport.
If you have intention of competing, then the training you take is for sport.

Lol k. I'm sure you are really fighting in your hapkido class. Sounds legit.

I don't know if this is malice or ignorance. At the very least, I'm going to have to assume willful ignorance, since I thought we already addressed this. You are making judgments based on stereotypes. Stereotypes that are incorrect.

 

[drop bear]

You'll have to forgive me. My google-fu is terrible. In fact, my Bachelor's degree was earned more through finding ways to connect the dots between the random articles I found, than it was finding articles that supported my conclusions. We all have strengths and weaknesses and research is NOT mine. In fact, I almost lost a friend over it, because we were working together on a project and he assigned me a bunch of research. I told him I was bad at it and he told me to do it anyway. So I did a horrible job and he yelled at me for it. Then the next day my Master told me he wanted me to become an instructor, and I quit working with my friend so I could teach, and we remained friends. I am a good Taekwondoist and a good teacher, but a horrible researcher.

Also, if our disagreement is over vocabulary, a video is not going to change that disagreement. Your post I quoted earlier where you defined what a sport is, that is actually what warmed me up to what you were saying.

As to this video - this is why I said "symmetric and asymmetric" instead of "self defense and sport" in my original post. Because these drills they are working on, are asymmetric, and can apply to both. I think their current intended application is sport, based on their location and the fact we see "MMA" watermarks plastered all over it. But you are right that it can also apply to self defense.

You linked sport to symmetric and street to asymmetric in your next paragraph.

A competent system regardless if sport or street will use both as necessary.

So this.

"An asymmetrical art is one in which the objective is different for each fighter, in general because you are training for a real-life situation. The scenarios you train for, your adversary will generally have an objective to do you harm, and your success condition is that he is unable to harm you."

Is a misconception. Hence video of asymmetric used in sports.

By the way. If you were doing a self defense drill to achieve the same end. (Say not getting dragged to the ground and having your guts stomped in) It should basically look the same.

And this is because the objectives tick the same boxes as sport in this instance.